The extent of the consensus among scientists on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has the potential to influence public opinion and the attitude of political leaders and thus matters greatly to society. This paperreinforces conclusions from previous research and reviews on this subject, which supported overwhelmingly AGM. In this study the author’s judgement of the search of over 24,000 articles suggests that the only possible conclusion is that there is no convincing evidence against AGW. There were only 5 articles that rejected AGW. Looking at these rejecting articles, as of January 2016, excluding self-citations, the five articles have been cited a total of once. What matters is not only how many articles reject AGW but also the quality of the evidence presented and the influence of those articles on science. Science can speak no more clearly: AGW is true.

President Obama evidently believes it does: In May 2013, he tweeted, “Ninetyseven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.” Yet the U.S. House of Representatives holds 40 times as many global warming rejecters as are found among the authors of scientific articles. To further delay action to prevent global warming is to force science to bow to ideology and politics. Hitler, Mao, and Stalin all tried that, with results fatal for tens of millions.

Abstract

The extent of the consensus among scientists on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has the potential to influence public opinion and the attitude of political leaders and thus matters greatly to society. The history of science demonstrates that if we wish to judge the level of a scientific consensus and whether the consensus position is likely to be correct, the only reliable source is the peer-reviewed literature. During 2013 and 2014, only 4 of 69,406 authors of peer-reviewed articles on global warming, 0.0058% or 1 in 17,352, rejected AGW. Thus, the consensus on AGW among publishing scientists is above 99.99%, verging on unanimity. The U.S. House of Representatives holds 40 times as many global warming rejecters as are found among the authors of scientific articles. The peer-reviewed literature contains no convincing evidence against AGW.